madvillian420
Well-Known Member
it was a perfect illustration of the ignorance of most of your ilk. Im really glad you posted it actually. Irked isnt the word.A year later he still is irked by my machine gun comment. Good
Gun control is coming
- Thread starter UncleBuck
- Start date
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
It backfired on you a bit. You misused the post to illustrate that there have been posters calling “any scary-looking semiautomatic rifle” “a machine gun”, failing to back your claim.
So it was a perfect illustration of something, but not of or relating to your claim.
madvillian420
Well-Known Member
so do you also think Rittenhouse used a machine gun then lol?
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Irrelevant. Illustrate your claim with a valid link.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Can you back your statement up with a credible source?
Because these people* say exactly the opposite of what you say. They went through all mass shootings 2009 and 2020. They report this:
Mass shootings involving assault weapons or high-capacity magazines were far deadlier.
When assault weapons and high-capacity magazines were used in mass shootings, they resulted in far more deaths and injuries. Between 2009 and 2020, the five deadliest mass shooting incidents in the US all involved the use of assault weapons and/or high-capacity magazines: Las Vegas, Orlando, Newtown, Sutherland Springs, and El Paso. 12
Assault weapons and high-capacity magazines were disproportionately used in public mass shootings. Of the shootings with known weapon type, 76 percent of those that involved an assault weapon and/or high-capacity magazine occurred in public compared to 44 percent of those that involved a handgun.13
* https://everytownresearch.org/maps/mass-shootings-in-america/#mass-shootings-involving-assault-weapons-or-high-capacity-magazines-were-far-deadlier
I'm pretty much focused on Oregon's measure 114. That measure was written with the intent of saving lives through reasonable changes to Oregon's gun laws. It has been examined and tested not only by academics but also in practice. In US districts where the measures contained in Measure 114 were implemented, those districts experienced drops in gun deaths by substantial amounts.**
And really, man, you must know this: In Oregon, it's not a matter of "if" but "when" another kid will show up at his high school or college and perform an Uvalde type mass shooting. Limiting the number of rounds in cartridges will not deprive civilians of their right to own and use a gun in self defense. Consider a limit on the number of rounds a cartridge or gun can hold to ten a down payment on scores of lives that will be taken if nothing is done.
**https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5ab5336270e802ff969f9c0f/t/635eac91f0e2db5da5ae2893/1667148945466/Measure+114+FAQ-+WEB.pdf
Methodology and definitions of terms used in every town research's report can be found here:
https://maps.everytownresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Everytown-mass-shootings-report-2009-2018_Methodology.pdf?_gl=1*168ept0*_ga*MTI4ODM2NzY0LjE2NzIzNzU0ODc.*_ga_LT0FWV3EK3*MTY3MjM3NTQ4Ny4xLjEuMTY3MjM3NTUyNS4wLjAuMA..
btw, you actually said something that was not a rhetorical fallacy. Good. I think you were talking out your ass in some of what you said. I refuted that in this post. But at least you were speaking about the subject in a way that could be reasoned with.
Last edited:
Southernontariogrower
Well-Known Member
We already have fun control in Canada but OPP officer got killed a few days ago. Close to home!
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
yeah, but handguns still strip them bare in sheer numbers...although in my link it states that semi automatic rifles were used in the 4 attacks that caused the most death and injury, including the Las Vegas shooting that killed 58 and injured 546....546...58 dead. how does the nra not cut it's own throat every morning when it looks in the mirror to shave?The trend has been toward AR-types, in lockstep with NRA advertising.
Semi-Automatic Rifles Becoming More Common In Mass Shootings
AR-15-style semi-automatic rifles or similar guns were used in at least six of the 14 mass shootings so far this year in which four or more victims died, says the Gun Violence Archive. In eight shootings, information was unavailable about the types of guns used, USA Today reports. While...www.ncja.org
it's all situational, even to homicidal fucks. a hand gun or two or even three are relatively easy to conceal, whereas a long arm is not...guess it depends on goals...
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
The term "sovereign citizen" is a bit of an oxymoron. Judges brandishing their power boner, is not evidence they have a better argument, it's usually evidence of the judges willingness to turn the guns of the state against a person that has presented a better argument. It's the normal evolution of any State based in offensive force. History shows ego and tyranny backed by guns of the state really heats up when the citizenry is disarmed. That's undeniable.
Anyhow, here we are with a standing army for foreign empire and multiple standing armies for domestic control over the citizen / serfs. All of those armies have mega weaponry don't they ?
In Madson's time, all men were declared to be created equal. How would governments get the extra rights to have weapons the citizenry can't, if the men in government never possessed the extra rights in the first place and all men are created equal? Citizens can't delegate rights they don't have can they?
Therefore the only gun control placed on citizenry should also be placed on their "servants" and be by unanimous agreement right?
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
I'm not certain but I believe the gentleman you quoted was injured in a tragic troll suicide attempt, perhaps mortally, I don't know for sure but I don't think guns were used in his demise.
Anyhow, the term "gun control" is a bit of a misnomer too.
Gun control isn't really applied to "government servants", it's applied to citizen /serfs.
Knowing this, it really should be termed "gun consolidation" as in, you don't have them, but they do. Just trying to straighten out the language used for clarity of the discussion.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
For a gun buyback to be truly voluntary, the funds used would have to come from voluntary donations.
Otherwise the alleged goal of "gun buy backs" to reduce violent uses or threats of violent uses of guns would be laid bare as blatantly hypocritical.
Doesn't government use guns to gain funding? Wouldn't people be threatened with a gun if they don't pay to fund gun buy backs under how gun buy backs operate presently?
I doubt anybody will address what I've said above, as it reframes things into a reality based structure rather than the one people have been trained to believe, which is a symptom of their learned mental capture. Ironically the mental capture structure is backed by guns.
Last edited:
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Would you be okay with funding citizen / serf gun buy backs thru involuntary confiscation of money using government guns to get the money if people didn't comply?
If so how is using threats of gun violence against millions of people going to reduce gun violence?
CunningCanuk
Well-Known Member
Someone has a conveniently selective understanding of history.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
While Madison didn't sign the Declaration of Independence, it was the opening document which lead to the formation of the new country. A big fuck you to King George etc.
I agree it should have said. "all people are created equal", as in all people have a right to self determine. The best way to defend a right, is not to go along with gun confiscations or infringments of citizenry.
History, as you mentioned, teaches us what happens when citizens are disarmed, other rights soon disappear.
Last edited:
Budley Doright
Well-Known Member
His post seems to be gone re “no vote”, the question had nothing to do with votes, but personal perceptions. Pad is not very good at this lol. He struggles to be relevant sometimes lol. The whole 2nd amendment support “people” also known as “they” struggle with logic it seems at times. To me that logic dictates less bullets means more down time, less bullets flying, less death but that’s only my opinion. I do find that when I did hunt with a rifle I only required 1or 2 shots for deer/moose, beyond that was just not a viable shot. It does make sense that if your firing at and trying to kill as many people in a crowd, the large cap gun would be a better choice thoughCanadians are still interested in the conversations regarding gun control, regardless of having a vote.
Insight: In fighting gun crime, Canada has an American problem
A Texas man bought dozens of guns from licensed dealers in the state before illegally reselling at least 16, U.S. officials say. Twelve were traced to crimes committed in America. The other four were traced to crimes in Canada.www.reuters.com
.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
His post seems to be gone re “no vote”, the question had nothing to do with votes, but personal perceptions. Pad is not very good at this lol. He struggles to be relevant sometimes lol. The whole 2nd amendment support “people” also known as “they” struggle with logic it seems at times. To me that logic dictates less bullets means more down time, less bullets flying, less death but that’s only my opinion. I do find that when I did hunt with a rifle I only required 1or 2 shots for deer/moose, beyond that was just not a viable shot. It does make sense that if your firing at and trying to kill as many people in a crowd, the large cap gun would be a better choice though
The question I ask you...
If you (singular or plural you ) were trying to take away a persons (single or plural persons) ability to defend themselves while you reduced many of their rights to government revokable privileges, would you want government to have "assault weapons" and citizenry not to ?
Is that question above, a logical one to ask given what history has shown us?
Oh, and happy new year to you sir!
CunningCanuk
Well-Known Member
The author of the bill of rights containing the second amendment that so many Americans hold dear didn’t feel compelled to extend this right to the people he owned.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
The bill of rights is a list of some rights, it doesn't intend or mean that rights come from government though. Aren't you the one just implying something about understanding history? Amendments 9 and 10 are begging for you to read them.
Anyhow, your "argument" about slave holders is a great argument. For me!
Slave holders in order to enslave people are the ones that keep guns and the slaves are the ones that got disarmed right?
I like it when your arguments aid mine. Keep it coming please.
I don't give a fuck about slave holding founding fathers hypocrisy anymore than I give a fuck about modern day rulers attempting to disarm people to institute their own brand of modern day slavery. Both have major planks in their eye.
but youre smart enough to know that AR is a term used for assualt rifle styles
like everyone calls everything that looks like tupperware....tupperware but mostbrands on the market arent tupperware despite being called that
come on now you know this
you also love going on about how canadians shouldnt have a say in american topics, but weve been throughthis too, america and canada are very intertwined countries.
Budley Doright
Well-Known Member
Great analogy. Are there still Tupperware parties lol? I live 5 miles from the border and yes US laws effect me very much unfortunately
. Someday I hope to visit again lol.